Ah yes. MOO 2.

The game with the AI that cheated so badly that the most generous thing you could say about it is that it was playing a different game.

Despite the cheating, the tactical combat was so easy to cheese that anyone who wanted to be effective at the game had to manually fight out every battle.

The end game consisted of taking your fleets around form planet to planet orbital bombarding everyone to death. The race with the fastest ships won because they could wipe out all the planets first.

That game right? That is the game you say is "king"?

GC2 is the AI's ability to take apart your ships in orbit one at a time & I really wish that stardock would change this. If I have five ships in orbit then the AI should have to take on all five at once the same way the player does when attacking an AI owned planet.

Good Idea !

Just thought I would point out in responce to post 29 that you need a fleet manager on your planet for the defending ships to be in a feet. The AI builds these things everywhere thats why most AI worlds pit you against a defence fleet.

Holy nastalgia batman... take off those fancy rose coloured glasses! How can you compare GalCiv2 to a pretender like MoO2 when Star Control II is king!!! Hehe!

Anyway, I'd to see even more planets, so that the uninhabitable planets can be mined for resources. More unique techs to research to add more personality and unpredictability (maybe only at late stages of the game).

But tactical combat, no way! Any shmuck can eventually figure out a way to exploit it. But perhaps it could be allowed in multiplayer for player vs. player combat. So if Stardock makes an expansion pack, it's something to consider.

Personally, I think turn-based multiplayer draws out the game too much even with pvp tactical combat. IMHO, RTS games are much better suited for multiplayer affairs.

Eric1000 - the 'ability' of the AI to take on your ships one at a time is simply the lack of an orbital fleet manager (which you can build after researching planetary defences I think) on the planet in question. This works in exactly the same way for the AI - no fleet manager = ships getting picked off one by one.

Edit: I see I was a bit slow posting this!

You used your ships strateigcally and it could make a huge difference to a battle.

yes.. let me activate that device that will allow me to move twice a turn..

Starbases are still overpowered yet you make their construction arduous through lack of meaningful automation of constructors.

I don't get people that complains about the starbase in this sense. Omg, it's overpowered. Omg, it's so hard to build.

Isn't that kinda the point? Starbases can give you a very very very nice boost, but you have to work your way there. Don't even get me started on how people complain about they spend so long building up their starbases but only to have it blown up. That's part of the reason why starbase isn't really over-powered if you respond to them right. With that said, military resources really is over-powered.. that's why you gotta take them out fast.

TBS is about building from start, not coming in half way through.

and tactical bomat is about using the few resources you have and change tide even though you are at a disadvantage. It does NOT mean owning everyone with weapons 3 generations more advanced.

In MoO2 you don't have to play from the start, but I guess you will not pick that option because you would lose the technological edge over the AI.

the games become infuriatingly slow as you have to actually play a ballanced game of moderated expansion & defense.

I take it you just want to expand faster than everyone else, research faster than everyone else, then build up the strongest military with your superior technology and get mad when the AI attack you in between.
I can see why you would want tactical combat so badly. You don't want to play a strategy game. It is clear that you just want the feeling of superiority over the computer, hence you would complain about AI cheating because you can't just rush and expand. In a real strategy game, you need to consider about eery aspect. Thus, it is important to play a balanced game of moderated expansion and defense. If AI found out that you are weak legitmately and attack you, that's not cheating.

If you play against an AI that just expands and doesn't build up any defense, what would you do? naturally, you'd build some transports and take over the planets. That sounds just about what the AI is doing to you.

All I can say is that it sounds like you don't really care for the strategy part, which is what GC2 focuses on. You only want the strategy part so you can get out better ships in which you will use to decimate AI ships in a tactics mode.

Tactic combat is nice and all, but it is tactics for a reason.


All in all, that's what I deduce about your play style from MoO2. I could be very wrong.. in that case, enlighten me.

it would be nice if you can keep a fleet based on your logistic ability around the planet though.. and have orbital fleet manager just increase it indefinitely.

Go Away. Period. Play your MOO2, and leave us alone with your dribble. I've had it up to here with people that come to any game's main forum just to slant the game. You like it? good, play it. You don't? Return it and be quiet. I have no idea why the fans even bother to rationalize themselves to this kind of people. MOO2 rocks. GalCiv2 rocks. These are both very different games in their core. Now go away.